Tony Snow

The Swiftboating of Governor Kathleen Sebelius

theBlueHighwayman — Fri, 11 May 2007 01:32:13 -0400

New sign on the Highways!

Dispatch from a Hotel in Normal, IL - 12:15A CST

Karl Rove and the gang are at it again, this time it is to destroy the Democratic Governor of Kansas. Her mortal sin was to tell the truth about the Kansas National Guard equipment.

Tony Snow, living up to his name, started the snowball rolling by stating "Governor Sebelius never requested anything from the Federal Government." Today that ball was picked up by none other than Sean Hannity. He interviewed two idiots from Pittsburgh, PA, who have a morning show on 104.7 FM (a Clearchannel station) and XM Radio named Quinn and Rose, and accused Howard Dean of orchestrating the Governor's statement for political gain.

The story goes like this:

Quinn and Rose say they have a "Confidential Source" who somehow managed to hear a conversation between the Senator and the Governor. It seems the Senator was displeased with Governor Sebelius's statements concerning the National Guard. In response she repents and claims that Howard Dean got her to do it. Presumably Howard Dean planned with Speaker Pelosi, Senator Reid, Senator Durbin and Senator Leahy to use the tragedy in Kansas to launch a political attack against Bush concerning the National Guard issue.

Here is the interview on Sean Hannity (It's an MP3 file about 6 minutes long)
INTERVIEW

After listening to these morons I called the radio station in Pittsburgh and left a message for Quinn and Rose's producer Jay Bahanon who returned my call and said:

We do have a confidential source on our report about the conversation between the governor of Kansas and Senator Brownback. I'm not going to give you any names if that's what you want, that's not going to happen. But we do have a good credible source on it.

If you would like to contact Quinn and Rose:
quinn@warroom.com
rose@warroom.com

Let them know how appreciative you are that they are busy carrying out Rove's dirty work! While you're at it maybe Jay Bahanon, their producer, would like to hear from you: 412-920-2796

I also think it would be a great idea to contact Senator Brownback to let him know how disgusting it is for a Presidential Candidate to be involved in this sort of thing.

Washington Office:
303 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510-1604
Phone: (202) 224-6521
Fax: (202) 228-1265

Main District Office:
612 S. Kansas Ave
Topeka, KS 66603
Phone: (785) 233-2503
Fax: (785) 233-2616

If you'd like to contact Governor Kathleen Sebelius just to let her know she has your support and that this despicable lie will never stand.

Website: http://www.governor.ks.gov

Contact the Governor
Office of the Governor
Capitol, 300 SW 10th Ave., Ste. 212S
Topeka, KS 66612-1590

Voice 1-877-KSWORKS (1-877-579-6757)
Local 785-296-3232
For the Hearing Impaired 1-800-766-3777

It is truly pathetic how desperate the Republicans have gotten. Don't let them get away with these grotesque attacks on Democratic politicians. This will probably not play big in NYC but out in Kansas Governor Sebelius is going to have to deal with the Rove machine.

Update 1: Media Matters has a transcript of the Hannity show and full documentation on the national guard equipment shortage.

Update 2: On Thursday, the DNC's lawyer, Joseph Sandler, sent cease and desist letters to XM Radio and FreeRepublic.com adamantly denying Gov. Dean had any such conversation with Gov. Sebelius. The letter to XM Vice President Dara Altman demands they:

immediately cease and desist, and instruct Messrs. Quinn and Rose to cease and desist, from further dissemination of the above-quoted statements or any statements similar in substance and
immediately - on tomorrow morning's show or the next morning's show, at the latest - broadcast on the Quinn & Rose show an express retraction of these statements.

The letter to FreeRepublic's James Robinson demands they:

immediately cease and desist from further dissemination of the above-quoted statements or any statements similar in substance and
immediately post a retraction of these statements in a location on its web page a[t] least as prominent as that on which the story appeared.

Update 3: Several rightwing blogs jumped on the story. HotAir published flat denials from Dean, Sebelius, and Brownback. GatewayPundit published a denial from Brownback. Wizbang has not published the denials.

Bush Cabal's Iran War Lies Falling Apart

CactusPat — Tue, 13 Feb 2007 17:21:02 -0500

Gen. Pace Equivocates, Tony SnowJob Reamed in WH Press Conference...

Pace Questions Whether Iran Arming Iraq JAKARTA, Indonesia (AP) - The top U.S. military officer said Tuesday the discovery that roadside bombs in Iraq contained material made in Iran does not necessarily mean the Iranian government was involved in supplying insurgents.... (more w/video)

The comments by Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, called into question assertions by three senior U.S. military officials in Baghdad on Sunday who said the highest levels of Iranian government were responsible for arming Shiite militants in Iraq with the bombs, blamed for the deaths of more than 170 troops in the U.S.-led coalition.

White House spokesman Tony Snow said Monday he was confident the weaponry was coming with the approval of the Iranian government.

Pace told reporters in the Indonesian capital, Jakarta, that U.S. forces hunting militant networks in Iraq that produced roadside bombs had arrested Iranians and some of the materials used in the devices were made in Iran.

"That does not translate that the Iranian government per se, for sure, is directly involved in doing this," Pace said. "What it does say is that things made in Iran are being used in Iraq to kill coalition soldiers."

On Monday, Pace said he had no firm knowledge that the Iranian government had sanctioned the arming of the insurgents.

"It is clear that Iranians are involved, and it's clear that materials from Iran are involved, but I would not say by what I know that the Iranian government clearly knows or is complicit," Pace told the Voice of America.

Iran denied it gave sophisticated weapons to militants to attack U.S. forces.

"Such accusations cannot be relied upon or be presented as evidence. The United States has a long history in fabricating evidence. Such charges are unacceptable," Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini told reporters in Tehran.

The Joint Chiefs chairman is the senior military adviser to the president, but he commands no troops and is not in the chain of command that runs from the president to the secretary of defense to commanders in the field.

Also see ME Online report "US general: no evidence Iran arming Iraq fighters"

We also have have CNN video via RawStory on SnowJob gettin' reamed on the Bushies Lies...

Replay video | Share video | Watch more videos

Tony 'Snowjob' Backs Granny Pelosi's Travel Arrangements

CactusPat — Fri, 09 Feb 2007 07:57:08 -0500

The real story ain't Granny Pelosi's travel arrangements, cause it ain't a story. The real story is the Repugnant smear and the corporate mediawhores falling for Reich-wing penis envy. Ya see, Nancy's (jet) is bigger than Denny's... btw, even though internally confined, Granny Nancy's have have always been larger than the shriveled raisins masquerading as gonads on Denny Hastert...

via ThinkProgress... Tony Snow, House Sergeant At Arms Rebut Right-Wing Attacks On Pelosi - You know the right wing has gone off the ledge when even Tony Snow can’t stand by their attacks. (more)

During today’s White House press briefing, Snow beat back the false claim that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) wants to misuse government resources. Snow called the conservative attacks a “silly story,” arguing that it is “important for the Speaker to have this kind of protection and travel.”

SNOW: I’ll just repeat our position, which is, as Speaker of the House, she is entitled to military transport, and that the arrangements, the proper arrangements are being made between the Sergeant of Arms office in the House of Representatives and the U.S. Department of Defense. We think it’s appropriate, and so, again, I think this is much ado about not a whole lot. It is important for the Speaker to have this kind of protection and travel. It was certainly appropriate for Speaker Hastert. So we trust that all sides will get this worked out.

Also today, House Sergeant at Arms Bill Livingood released a new statement emphasizing that it was he — not Pelosi — who requested she use an aircraft capable of flying non-stop to her district in California to “ensure communications capabilities and also enhance security.”

In a post 9/11 threat environment, it is reasonable and prudent to provide military aircraft to the Speaker for official travel between Washington and her district. … The fact that Speaker Pelosi lives in California compelled me to request an aircraft that is capable of making non-stop flights for security purposes, unless such an aircraft is unavailable. This will ensure communications capabilities and also enhance security. … I regret that an issue that is exclusively considered and decided in a security context has evolved into a political issue.

Read the full Sergeant at Arms statement:

Statement of the House Sergeant at Arms

As the Sergeant at Arms, I have the responsibility to ensure the security of the members of the House of Representatives, to include the Speaker of the House. The Speaker requires additional precautions due to her responsibilities as the leader of the House and her Constitutional position as second in the line of succession to the presidency.

In a post 9/11 threat environment, it is reasonable and prudent to provide military aircraft to the Speaker for official travel between Washington and her district. The practice began with Speaker Hastert and I have recommended that it continue with Speaker Pelosi. The fact that Speaker Pelosi lives in California compelled me to request an aircraft that is capable of making non-stop flights for security purposes, unless such an aircraft is unavailable. This will ensure communications capabilities and also enhance security. I made the recommendation to use military aircraft based upon the need to provide necessary levels of security for ranking national leaders, such as the Speaker. I regret that an issue that is exclusively considered and decided in a security context has evolved into a political issue.

What silliness, and un-needed distraction. I've done my best to ignore this non-story, and hopefully now it's gone for good...

The Friday Political Grab Bag

Bob Geiger — Fri, 17 Nov 2006 14:07:15 -0500

If it's Friday, it's time to take a look at what's been floating around the political world this week and that I haven't commented on, might have slipped under your radar or has just flat-out been too silly for you to notice…

Nancy's Got Guts - House Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi’s choice of John Murtha to be the new House Majority Leader, her steadfast support of his candidacy and Murtha's loss to Steny Hoyer, hardly spell an initial political defeat for the most powerful person in the new House of Representatives. If anything, it bodes well for the kind of true leadership we can expect from Pelosi, who had to know Hoyer would win and, accepting the political consequences, stuck by Murtha right up until the vote yesterday.

We may not always like everything Pelosi does over the next two years, but I'd bet anything she sticks to her guns in the face of even tougher stuff from the other side of the aisle.

* * * * *In addition to being a great guy and one of our favorite editorial cartoonists, the Houston Chronicle's Nick Anderson is also getting into doing animated political cartoons. His latest is a snarky take on how the GOP politicized the entire immigration issue leading up to the midterm elections.

Please go to Nick's site to check it out.

* * * * *
Following Bush's Bad Act - Which Republican will be the standard bearer -- lack-of-standard bearer? -- for the GOP in the 2008 presidential race? We're pretty damn sure that two former governors are running: Mitt Romney of Massachusetts and George Pataki of New York.

If one of them makes it all the way to the nomination and begins trying to act like a moderate, let's not forget the e-mails they sent out in the final week of the midterm-election campaign this year.

Here's Romney:

"My administration said 'no' to the Democrats' favorite revenue-raising tool: higher taxes.

"President Bush faced similar opposition from the Democrats when he cut taxes in 2001 and 2003 for all taxpayers. In fact , more than 90% of congressional Democrats voted against cutting federal income tax rates. Now some Democrats are calling for the tax cuts to be rolled back if they win control of Congress in November.

"That's why it is absolutely critical we elect Republican majorities to the U.S. House and U.S. Senate so taxes aren't raised and our economic growth isn't stifled through overregulation.

"We are fortunate to have a President who has made clear that he will give terrorism no quarter. President Bush and the Republican Congress are unwavering in the War on Terror and defending our country from future attacks. Despite the successes we've had apprehending terrorist operatives and preventing another strike on our homeland, some Democrats are now calling for President Bush to be impeached for his efforts to protect America from further terrorist attacks."

And George Pataki:

"When RNC Chairman Ken Mehlman asked me to help make sure our Party's Get-Out-The-Vote programs are fully funded, I jumped at the chance.

"Maintaining control of the U.S. Congress is crucial to helping President Bush finish the job he started six years ago. Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are poised to lead a Democrat House and Senate that will stop our agenda cold in its tracks.

"If we fail to win, liberal Democrats will take over every committee in Congress and undo everything President Bush and the GOP Congress have accomplished -- including rolling back the landmark tax cuts and reducing our commitment to winning the War against Terror."

It's pretty routine stuff: Democrats will raise your taxes -- despite the fact that no Democrat running for Congress in 2006 ever advocated across-the-board tax increases. So, in other words, Romney and Pataki lied by omission at the very least.

Oh, and they also go with the usual smears, implying that electing Democrats means we get overrun by terrorists.

File this stuff away for 2008.

* * * * *For sheer stupid fun, GSN, the Network for Games, gives us a Flash game called Foley's Follies, in which disgraced Republican Mark Foley chases young Congressional Pages around the corridors of power ala Pac-Man. Players guide the former Congressman through a maze while trying to chase down the Pages and, whenever the Foley head hits an IM bubble and he catches a Page, actual Foley quotes from the infamous IM transcripts appear at the bottom of the screen.

You can play here. Go on… You know you want to.

* * * * *Sometimes I Get More Than Hate Mail - Earlier this year, I did a dumb story about a live, two-headed snake that was discovered and made wise-guy comments about naming the two heads 'McClellan' and 'Mehlman.'

Almost a year later, Mr. Vishwanath Maddhukuri, from somewhere in India made me an offer I'm going to have to refuse:

Hi

My relatives have found Two headed snake in India. It is there in India, if you are interested to buy, let me know

Regards
Vishwa

Besides, Vishwa admitted that the two heads are already named Coulter and Malkin.

* * * * *As if Fox News didn’t do enough damage to itself this week, here they are reinforcing their ongoing, McCarthyite question -- "Are liberal blogs sending the same message as terrorists?"

Could be… I think even nutcase religious fanatics also think the people at Fox are idiots.

* * * * *Knucklehead Corporate Media Person of the Week - It's "Lester" who asked White House Spokesman Tony Snow the question that was obviously on everyone's mind Monday:

"In the primary election in Connecticut, the Democratic Party, as you know, repudiated Senator Lieberman who went on to be the winner as an independent. And the Democratic Party did not even have a nominee for the U.S. Senate in Vermont. Yet, they are claiming these two winners helped them constitute a majority in the Senate. And my question, doesn't the -- doesn't the President believe this Democrats-claim- everybody theory should and could be tested in court?"

But Snow set him straight: "Lester, as you know, when it comes to the organization of Congress, people get to decide with whom they will caucus. And the indications are that Bernard Sanders and Joe Lieberman would caucus with Democrats. This is not something subject to court order, it is their personal choice."

Note to Lester: Go to Amazon.com and pick up a copy of 'Congress for Dummies' before the next press briefing.

* * * * *Hypocrites r' Us: The Republican Superstore - Here's outgoing Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist on the Senate floor Monday talking about the need to heal wounds and work across the aisle:

"But as we move forward -- and that really does officially begin today -- we begin with finishing the business of the 109th Congress, and we must work together to overcome that partisanship we have seen in the past, that crippling partisanship that has plagued us in the recent past.

"America wants results and America wants solutions, and it is with that focus we enter the waning days of the 109th Congress. We must return to an era of working together in a civil, bipartisan fashion. It is my hope both parties, Republicans and Democrats, will work toward governing together to produce those solutions, to produce those tangible results for the American people. That begins here, and it begins now."

Excuse me… I'm a little misty-eyed.

OK. This would be fine and dandy if Frist didn’t say this after two years of making Harry Reid's life hell, threatening to kill the filibuster -- one of the few procedural tools available to the minority party -- and shutting down almost every Democratic initiative, regardless of merit, on purely political grounds.

Spare us the histrionics, Billy, and just clear out Harry Reid's new office.

* * * * *Wyden Hamstrings EPA on Unacceptable Benzene Levels - Oregon Democrat Ron Wyden has had enough of Bush administration environmental rules that actually hurt people and the earth -- go figure! Specifically, Wyden objects to a proposed Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ruling on the amount of the cancer-causing chemical benzene that can be in gasoline and he's willing to put a Senatorial hold on the confirmation of EPA General Counsel nominee Roger Martella unless the rule is changed to protect people in his state.

Any Senator can place a long-term hold on a nomination and, while it can be done in secret, Wyden always announces his holds publicly along with his reasons. You can read about it here.

Come January, Wyden will just be able to round up the Democratic caucus and vote Bush's nominees down if the EPA doesn’t want to do the right thing.

* * * * *Bush Eats The Young - Yes, I know this is just so wrong…

And yet it feels so right…

Eat well this weekend!

You can read more from Bob at BobGeiger.com.

What Republicans Call 'Spin' the Rest of The World Calls 'Lies'

Bob Geiger — Thu, 02 Nov 2006 10:48:55 -0500

My young son and I were talking last week about the definition of a lie. As a nine-year-old, he's expanding his boundaries and testing the waters on how little he can get away with telling my wife and me without crossing the line into being a liar. This seems to me like a perfectly normal part of childhood development so, as we talked, I used an example from last winter, when we had a misunderstanding about whether or not his school had been closed in advance of a monster snowstorm.

He told me the night before that he heard from one of the teachers that, because of the magnitude of the expected storm, classes had been called off in advance for the next day. We found out later that night that this information was incorrect, that a preemptive snow-day had not been called and my little boy promptly apologized for "lying."

I asked at the time if he knew that a snow-day had really not been called and, when he replied that he really did believe his information was correct, I explained that he had simply been mistaken and that he had not lied. If he had found out at 6:00 PM that his information was wrong, I said to him, telling me at 7:00 PM that school had already been canceled would indeed have been a lie.

My little boy understands and acknowledges that obvious distinction -- Republicans do not.

As if we need more evidence of this, Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman sent out an e-mail blast yesterday lashing John Kerry for allegedly insulting America's military personnel.

"Listen closely this election season and you'll hear the truth about what Democrats represent," wrote Mehlman. "Monday, failed Presidential candidate John Kerry brazenly insulted the brave American men and women serving in our military. In Kerry's cocoon of privilege, those who serve in our military are failures who never did their homework or 'made an effort to be smart.'"

"Our troops deserve to be honored, not insulted by the likes of John Kerry."

Mehlman ended his deceptive pitch by getting down to brass tacks and saying "We need you now to keep the John Kerry Democrats out of power."

By any sensible person's definition -- and what an average grade-school child would understand -- is that this was a lie. Ken Mehlman knew when he released this e-mail that John Kerry had not "brazenly insulted the brave American men and women serving in our military." He knew from a comparison of the prepared text and how Kerry bungled the joke he intended to tell that it was meant for Mehlman's master, George W. Bush, and not the troops in Iraq and that there was certainly nothing brazen about it.

He knew all of that as a matter of fact, in addition to knowing that, unlike the vast majority of the Republican leadership, John Kerry is a highly-decorated Veteran, who has always fought for America's Vets and active-duty military and would never lob such disrespect their way.

But Mehlman said it anyway. He knew at 1:00 PM that what he was writing was a lie. But he sent the e-mail at 2:00 PM anyway.

George W. Bush did the same thing in a speech after Kerry made his remarks but well after the truth of the Massachusetts Senator's intent was known -- he bashed Kerry, knowing it would be all over the world on nightly newscasts and also knowing that it was a total lie.

But, of course, it's not just confined to John Kerry or this one, isolated non-story.

Enter White House Press Secretary Tony Snow, who just yesterday, went to the Brady Briefing Room and told the nation's Press Corps a lie that all national Republicans continue to offer, despite substantial evidence to the contrary.

"You have heard me talk in recent days about how important it is to get people to focus on substantive issues," said Snow to the White House press. "And again, it's striking that in the war on terror -- winning the war on terror, Democrats have decided they're not going to tell you what their plan is. It's the most important issue; why not tell you what the plan is?"

White House reporters, perhaps tiring of being played for chumps and fed the Democrats-don't-have-a-plan line over and over again, immediately called Snow on it.

"You say that you want to see Democrats offer -- engage in a more substantive way on Iraq," pressed one reporter. "And yet when Democrats do that, their ideas are either rejected out of hand, as was the case with Biden's idea of partitioning Iraq, or in the case of Murtha, he had Republican members of Congress effectively accuse him of being a coward and say that the idea doesn't reflect reality. So when you have substantive proposals, redeploying troops is a substantive proposal, partitioning the country is substantive."

In addition to Democrat Jack Murtha learning that bringing an Iraq plan to the Republicans gets you called a coward -- even if you are a decorated combat Veteran who spent 37 years in the U.S. Marines -- the biggest element of Snow's lie is how he willfully ignores that Democrats put forth a major, comprehensive security initiative in the Senate less than two months ago and had it shot down by the GOP leadership.

On September 13, 2006, the Real Security Act of 2006, sponsored by Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), was killed by an almost straight party-line vote in the Senate. The legislation, all 528 pages of it, offered, as its amendment purpose stated, "to provide real national security, restore United States leadership, and implement tough and smart policies to win the war on terror."

That's 528 pages of detailed description of the Democratic plan to secure our domestic infrastructure, end the war in Iraq and bring our military men and women home to their families.

But, just yesterday, in saying that Democrats have never told anyone what their plan is, Tony Snow lied yet again. This is not subject to partisan interpretation -- it is a lie. See for yourself: You can go here to see the legislation, S.AMDT. 4936.

And perhaps the most despicable of the lies surrounding the GOP's manufactured news story about John Kerry, is the fact that Republican John McCain, a fellow decorated Veteran and someone Kerry once called a friend, kept the lie going for his party in spite of what he knew was the truth. Even after the context of Kerry's remarks became clear to anyone interested in reality, McCain went on the attack, demanding that Kerry apologize for sentiments that McCain knew full well were a twisted invention of his own party.

Mighty disgusting stuff to be sure.

Politics can often be much more gray than black and white. Certainly, I've learned in covering the United States Senate that things are sometimes not what they seem and that the process of governing can at times be complex and filled with nuance.

But there are some things that are absolute. And one of those is that the Republican party of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, Ken Mehlman, Tony Snow and John McCain is filled throughout with a craven pack of liars whose only interest is to remain in power, while railroading those who oppose them and scaring the hell out of each and every American along the way to achieve their goals.

Election day is Tuesday. It is time to begin throwing the liars out.

You can read more from Bob at BobGeiger.com.

Tony Snow Channels Scott "The Lyin' King" McClellan

Bob Geiger — Fri, 06 Oct 2006 09:53:47 -0400

I often miss former White House Press Secretary Scott "The Lyin' King" McClellan. When there was a slow news day -- not that there have been many of those in the last few years -- you could always count on McClellan, who left his post earlier this year, to be a weasel in such an over-the-top way that, if nothing else, it was good for some humor.

I mean, McClellan was a weasel's weasel… Helen Thomas could ask Scott if Sunday would follow Saturday this weekend and he would say something like "Well, as you know, Helen, I can't comment on a hypothetical like that. I think the president has made clear that he's focused on the business of the American people and not whether Sunday will or will not follow Saturday."

He would then say "September 11" and "ongoing investigation" a few times and go on to the next question…. Sigh. Good times, good times.

But current Bush spokesman Tony Snow is a bit more to the point -- he generally just directly refuses to answer many questions, without the comical hemming and hawing that we got from McClellan.

But Snow came close to inheriting McClellan's weasel pelt yesterday when asked repeatedly about whether or not Bush supports Dennis Hastert remaining as House Speaker, despite having ignored Republican Mark Foley chasing teenaged boys around the halls of Congress.

Let's listen to questioning on the general Republican handling of the Foley, um, affair:

Q: Tony, you said that the President is talking about things that matter --

Snow: Yes.

Q: Does it matter how Republican leaders handle this issue with Mark Foley?

Snow: I think this thing has to -- as we've said, you've got to find out what happened. This is disgusting and I don't think any sane person in any way condones what happened. The Speaker -- I'm sure the Speaker doesn't condone what happened. But they're going to have to -- they're dealing with the problem, and we'll just -- the President's concern is get the facts out. There are already hearings before the Senate -- I mean, the House Ethics Committee; there's also an investigation going on at the Justice Department. You need to find out what it is, you need to fix it.

Q: Well, my question was, does it matter how Republican leaders handled this information --

Snow: Well, again, I think -- yes. And I think it's -- let me put it this way -- it is important for all members of Congress to make sure -- and this is an opportunity for people to figure out whether they've got a systemic problem -- to make sure that when pages or other -- when people come to Washington, that they don't have to worry about this kind of behavior on the part of any member of Congress, or any member of congressional staff, or anybody working for the government. That's important because there's a public trust, and people around the country have not been all that happy with politics in recent months, at least if you look at the polls in the general way in which they look at it. And it's important for people to realize that we do take matters like this seriously.

Q: Okay, but I feel like you're ducking this a little bit -- what's an important question to me is, is this not a test of Republican leadership?

Snow: Is it not a test of Republican leadership? In what sense?

Q: The original question was, does it matter how Republican leaders handle this issue?

Snow: Okay, and I will dodge it and I will tell you exactly why I'm going to dodge it. Because this is a question that requires knowledge of a lot of details that are not in evidence, certainly not to me, at this point. So for somebody to try to --

Q: It isn't a trial, Tony.

Here's Snow ducking questions about Hastert in particular:

Q: Tony, has the President talked to Speaker Hastert since this whole thing started?

Snow: No.

Q: Has he asked to talk with him?

Snow: No. No.

Q: Why not?

Snow: Just hasn't.

Q: He's not curious about his explanation or how he's handled it so far?

Snow: No. You've got to understand, again, in separate and co-equal branches of government, everybody here wants the President to come in and tell the House how to do its business. We don't know what happened. You don't know what happened. I mean, we know that there was some grotesque IMs and there were some inappropriate emails, and there is something that sickens anybody who has read even part of those. And that should never happen, ever. And that is something that people have a right to find out what happened and they've got to figure out how to fix it.

But the President is running the executive branch of government and members of the House are going to have to deal with it.

Q: Is this a separation of powers issue, Tony, or is this a determined effort to insulate the White House from this whole thing?

Snow: No, I don't think -- look, this is an issue that everybody cares about, but it's also an issue that -- the House has to figure out what happened; the House is the proper place for investigating the behavior of its members, although the Justice Department does now have an investigation ongoing. But let me also clarify, in case anybody wondered, this is not a White House that orders up investigations, and so we have nothing to do formally or informally with that investigation. Look, this is a horrible thing. People do deserve to know what happened, and they do deserve to know how to fix it, and there's going to be a lot of conversation about that. We understand that.

Here's the part where I really started getting misty-eyed thinking about old times with Scotty:

Q: Can I just follow on one point, Tony? It strikes me that you're trying to have something here both ways. The President does not believe that Speaker Hastert should resign, this is his position. Is that to say that he is satisfied with the conduct of Speaker Hastert and other Republican leaders on this matter?

Snow: I understand the question, but I'm just not -- as I said at the outset, I'm not going to get into discussing, evaluating, reviewing, rehearsing what members of the House have done.

Q: But in making the judgment that he shouldn't resign, you're not saying the President is making a judgment?

Snow: No. I'm just saying he's supporting the --

Q: How do you explain that?

Snow: -- he's saying at this point that the Speaker should not resign.

Q: We should not take from that -- that view that he should not resign -- that the President is satisfied with his conduct in this matter?

Snow: I'm just saying -- I know it's maddening, and I apologize, but we're just --

Q: That's a straightforward question.

Snow: No, it is a straightforward question and I'm given you -- going back to the caveat I issued at the top. As interesting and as inviting as it may be for us to try to stand and render judgment on the House's pursuance of this issue, I'm just not going to do it; including talking about whether we support or defend -- the President, again, has said that he supports the Speaker and doesn't think he should resign.

And just a little more -- and watch how the reporter really makes Tony Snowjob squirm with the contradiction of Bush having enough information to strongly support Hastert, but not enough to comment on Hastert's response to the Foley scandal:

Q: From this podium you have said that this is the party of ethical standards.

Snow: Right.

Q: And that is what this source from the Christian right said, that Hastert should have, at the time of hearing upon these overly friendly emails, he should have at least contacted authorities. And because of failed leadership, he should step down.

Snow: I understand all that and, as I said, all of these are things I'm not going to play -- I'm just not going to grade performance and I'm also not going to assume that I know all the facts that come to bear on making such judgments.

Q: Does the administration understand the Christian right's thought? As you say, you are the party of ethical standards. Do you understand --

Snow: We understand people's real concern about this. I mean, people ought to be concerned. It's a hideous thing.

Q: Failed leadership, and possible issues --

Snow: Again, April, perhaps you know each and every fact here. You know, I think it's incumbent on members of both parties to make sure that they behave properly when it comes to any individual or constituent. As I said before, there's a systemic problem they've got to deal with, but they certainly have a particular problem that they've got to get to the bottom of, they've got to find the truth, and they've got to deal with it.

Jessica.

Q: Tony, can you try to explain or clarify, why is the White House supporting Hastert in staying in the speakership job when you don't have all the facts? You've been saying over and over, we don't have all the facts. So why are you supporting his staying in the job --

Snow: Well, based on what we know -- again, if you have a situation where you say support or don't support, in absence of full information, we're sticking with what we've got.

Q: Well, why not say, we don't know -- we don't know whether or not he should stay in that leadership role because we don't have all the facts?

Snow: Because we don't think that Denny Hastert is the kind of guy who says, man, that's great stuff, I'm really glad Foley was doing that on the sly. We think that everybody who is -- that decent people were just absolutely sickened by this and we hope that people are going to work together on Capitol Hill, Democrats and Republicans, to fix it.

Q: So you are saying that you believe that Hastert has handled the situation appropriately?

Snow: As I told you -- I knew this would happen and I'm going to be firm, consistent, and non-responsive.

Wow.

Didn’t you like the whole separation-of-powers thing? While the Republican Congress has certainly abandoned their oversight of the executive branch -- they believe in an impenetrable brick wall between the branches, damn the Constitution -- that's hilarious coming from a White House that's had Karl Rove meddling in every detail of what little legislative work has actually been done in the 109th Congress. No separation there, baby!

This all has me a little emotional. I'm going to curl up with a glass of good bourbon tonight, look at old transcripts from the McClellan era and remember when the press-relations weasels were more direct in their weaselly essence and roamed free every day, and not just on special occasions, at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

You can read more from Bob at BobGeiger.com.

Media, Not Military, Alerted Bush to Haditha Massacre

Chip — Wed, 31 May 2006 04:16:24 -0400

White House Press Secretary Tony "Snowjob" Snow said today that Mr. Bush first learned of killing of two dozen Iraqi civilians at Haditha from the press"when a Time reporter first made the call." "Snowjob" resisted answering directly when asked what Bush's "personal involvement" has been, saying "I'm not going to get into his personal involvement." Excuse me? A mass murder by US military personnel may have occurred, and your "values" guide you to duck and dodge questions without so much as "Let me look into it and follow-up?"

So some of the questions are: Why wasn't Bush briefed by the military? Why was he kept in the dark? Where did the reporting responsibility for Haditha stop, and why?

The Marine assault on Iraqi civilians, including seven women, and three children, all unarmed except for one, occurred November 19, 2005, and was first reported by Time more than four months later on March 27, 2006. Kilo Company, 3rd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment has since rotated back to California, and the battalion commander and two company commanders were relieved of duty.

The assault followed the death of a Marine Lance Corporal killed when his humvee was hit by an IED. If true, the event is the worst case of deliberate killing of Iraqi civilians by US service members since the war began, according to human rights activists.

Time reports that the military stood by its original contention that the Iraqi civilians were killed by an insurgent bomb until January, 2006, when Time delivered a video of the aftermath and witness statements to Colonel Barry Johnson, a US military spokesman in Baghdad. He passed the evidence up the command, recommending a "a full and formal investigation." In February, an infantry colonel determined after a week long investigation that the civilians had been killed by Marines, citing the deaths as "collateral damage" not malicious intent by the Marines, according to investigators. The US government has already paid relatives of the victims $2,500 for each of the dead civilians, and lesser amounts to the injured.

Two sets of photos have surfaced. One set was taken by someone in Kilo Company, and one Marine emailed a photo taken of the Haditha aftermath back to the states. A Marine intelligence team apparently deleted photos of the scene because they had no intelligence information of value. It is expected that at least some members of Kilo Company will be charged, quite possibly including for murder, which carries the death penalty under the military's legal system, the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Two weeks ago, Marine officials briefed members of Congress. Sunday, decorated Marine officer and Pennsylvania congressman John Murtha, the ranking Democrat on the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee in the House, told George Stephanopoulous of ABC's This Week that if the allegations against Kilo Company Marines are true, Haditha is "worse than Abu Ghraib," calling their actions war crimes committed "in cold blood." "These kind of things have to be brought out immediately," he told "because if the Marines got away with it, other Marines might think it's okay."

Ironically, Congressman Murtha submitted HR 73, a resolution to remove forces from Iraq, two weeks after the Haditha massacre but while he was unaware of it.

Murtha enlisted in the Marines to serve in the Korean War. He rose through the ranks, becoming first a drill instructor at Parris Island, and then was selected for Officer Candidate School. After discharge from active duty, he remained in the reserves, then volunteered for service in Vietnam in 1966-67 and was assigned as a battalion intelligence officer.

The following year, 1968, the My Lai massacre occurred when between 347 and 504 civilians were murdered by US forces. As a result, the Medina standard was established. It holds that a commanding officer, being aware of a human rights violation or a war crime, will be held criminally liable when he does not take action.

Which brings us back to why the Commander in Chief was informed of the military's assault on Haditha civilians by the media instead of the military chain of command.

Who is in charge here?

Treasury Nominee: Old Watergate Hand

Chip — Tue, 30 May 2006 19:10:56 -0400

In tapping Henry "Hank" M. Paulson, Jr. for his new Secretary of the Treasury, George Bush has literally taken a play from Richard Nixon's playbook. Paulson worked in the Nixon administration as assistant to John Ehrlichman, mastermind of the Watergate "Plumbers," from 1972-1973. Nixon asked for Ehrlichman's resignation in April, 1973. He was convicted of conspiracy, obstruction of justice, and perjury in 1975. He served 18 months in prison and was not pardoned.

The goal of Watergate was to undermine the Democratic Party and the opposition to the Vietnam war. Today, the unpopularity of the Iraqi invasion is a glaring parallel, as is Nixon's penchant for covert operations.

Paulson also served as staff assistant to the assistant to Secretary of Defense, Melvin Laird, from 1970-1972.

In a poorly kept secret, Bush attempted to conceal the impending change by lying. As recently as May 25, 2006, George Bush was asked if Treasury Secretary Snow was leaving. He replied: "No, he has not talked to me about resignation. I think he's doing a fine job."

During today's press briefing, Tony "Snowjob" Snow related:

MR. SNOW: Yes, the tick-tock is the two of them met on the 20th of May and there was a conversation, and Hank Paulson accepted the job a day later. That was subject to clearance. It does take time, especially for a Senate-confirmable position, to complete those, so it did take time to get some of those clearances wrapped up.

Q So that's why there's been no announcement between May 21st and --

MR. SNOW: Correct."

Wall Street failed to be buoyed by the news of one of their own managing Treasury; the Dow, Nasdaq and S&P all closed considerably lower.

Snowjob Debuts; Blows Job

Chip — Fri, 12 May 2006 18:41:24 -0400

Tony Snow, former FOX News commentator and new Bush media meister, debuted Friday in 23 chaotic minutes riddled with gaffes and apologies. Asked to critique his first Q&A session, the administration's new press secretary remarked, "It obviously at this point is just a mess."

Clearly enamored of his new digs and eager to impress his old colleagues by showing them off, "Snowjob" impulsively moved the informal morning "gaggle" to his new office. It quickly overflowed so that some old hands were barely able to hear or ask questions.

Snowjob refused to respond to questions about currency issues as consumer confidence has plummeted on two months of rising gas prices, and the stock market dove following news of how richly Bush's millionaire cronies will be rewarded by his tax cuts. (The wealthiest top 0.1% will enjoy a windfall savings of $82,000 on average. In contrast, workers earning between $27,000-$47,000 will average $20 in savings.)

There's room to wonder how well-versed Snowjob is in financial matters and fiscal affairs as he disclosed, "As a matter of fact, I was even too dopey to get in on a 401-K."

Though Snowjob could neither "confirm nor deny" the existence of the NSA's surveillance program that monitors the phone calls of millions of Americans, he was certain that the situation wouldn't affect the White House plans for winning congressional confirmation of Gen. Michael Hayden as the next CIA director.

General Hayden was director of the National Security Agency in 2001 when Bush first began his warrantless monitoring of communications between those in and outside the US.